CTNF 18/819,688 CTNF 80607 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election/Restrictions 08-25 AIA Applicant's election with traverse of Species A, claims 1-3 and 6-10 in the reply filed on 22 May 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “Applicant notes that the two species are so closely related in the field of liquid ejection heads that all of the claims can be searched simultaneously, and that a duplicative search, with possibly inconsistent results, may occur if the election of species requirement is maintained. Applicant requests reconsideration and withdrawal of the election of species requirement on these bases. Applicant further submits that any nominal burden placed upon the Examiner to search an additional subclass or two, necessary to determine the art relevant to Applicant's overall invention, is significantly outweighed by the public interest in not having to obtain and study several separate patents in order to have available all of the issued patent claims covering Applicant's invention. The alternative is to proceed with the filing of multiple applications, each consisting of generally the same disclosure, and each being subjected to essentially the same search, perhaps by different Examiners on different occasions. This places an unnecessary burden on both the Patent and Trademark Office and on Applicant. In the interest of economy, for the Office, for the public-at-large, and for Applicant, Applicant requests reconsideration and withdrawal of the election of species requirement.” This is not found persuasive because although there is no requirement to show separate classification in regards to an election of species, a burden does exist because a separate search would be required. Claims 4 and 5 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 22 May 2026 . The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The reference cited in the information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 29 August 2024, has been considered. Drawings 06-36 AIA The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “flow passage forming substrate” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification 06-31 AIA The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Examiner’s Note The examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicant should consider the entire prior art as applicable as to the limitations of the claims. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the response, to consider fully the entire references as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 1. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the flow passage forming substrate" in lines 4 and 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the examiner will construe “the flow passage forming substrate” as “the channel substrate”. 2. Claims 2-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, for being dependent upon claim 1 with the above addressed 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA) problems. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3 and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Momose et al. (US 5,956,058) . With respect to claim 1, Momose discloses a liquid ejection head comprising: a liquid ejection substrate (Fig. 1, element 100) for ejecting a liquid (Column 6, lines 46-56), wherein the liquid ejection substrate includes a channel substrate (Fig. 1, element 4) and a support substrate (Fig. 1, element 10) which is bonded to the channel substrate via an adhesive (Column 7, lines 6-9 and 50-54), the channel substrate (Fig. 2, element 4) includes a common flow channel (Fig. 2, element 6) which communicates with a flow passage (Fig. 1, element 46) formed in the support substrate and an individual flow channel (Fig. 2, element 7) which communicates with the common flow channel (Column 6, lines 57-65), and among a corner portion (Fig. 8, elements 6b, 6c) of an end portion (Fig. 8, element 6a) of the common flow channel (Fig. 8, element 6), an angle (Fig. 8, i.e. supplementary angle of θ 1 or θ 2 ) of the corner portion which is closest to the individual flow channel (Fig. 8, element 7) is larger than 90° (Column 7, lines 43-49). The examiner notes to applicant that the limitations concerning the corner portion of the end portion of the common flow channel are broad in scope and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Momose as applied above. With respect to claim 2, Momose discloses one of the end portion (Fig. 8, element 6a) includes four or more of the corner portions (Fig. 8, elements 6b, 6c and corner illustrated below θ 2 ). With respect to claim 3, Momose discloses each of the four or more corner portions (Fig. 8, elements 6b, 6c and corner illustrated below θ 2 ) has a curved shape (Fig. 8, i.e. interface between elements 6 and 7), and among the four or more corner portions, a radius of curvature of the corner portion which is closest to the individual flow channel has a largest value (Fig. 8, element 6c, i.e. supplementary angle of θ 1 ; Column 7, lines 48-49) . With respect to claim 6, Momose discloses as viewed (Fig. 8) from a direction perpendicular to a surface of the liquid ejection substrate (Fig. 1, element 100), an angle of the corner portion which is closest to the individual flow channel (Fig. 8, element 7) is larger than 90° (Fig. 8, element 6c, i.e. supplementary angle of θ 1 ; Column 7, lines 48-49). With respect to claim 7, Momose discloses the common flow channel (Fig. 2, element 6) communicates with a plurality of the individual flow channels (Fig. 2, array of element 7; Column 6, lines 57-65). With respect to claim 8, Momose discloses the plurality of individual flow channels (Fig. 2, array of element 7) are arrayed in parallel with a longitudinal direction of the common flow channel (Fig. 2, element 6). With respect to claim 9, Momose discloses in a direction (Fig. 8) orthogonal to the longitudinal direction of the common flow channel (Fig. 5, element 6), a center of the common flow channel (Fig. 2, one of element 6) and a center of each individual flow channel (Fig. 2, one of element 7) are misaligned from each other. With respect to claim 10, Momose discloses a liquid ejection apparatus comprising: a liquid ejection head (Fig. 1; Column 1, lines 15-27) including a liquid ejection substrate (Fig. 1, element 100) for ejecting a liquid (Column 6, lines 46-56), in which the liquid ejection substrate includes a flow passage forming substrate (Fig. 1, element 4) and a support substrate (Fig. 1, element 10) which is bonded to the flow passage forming substrate via an adhesive (Column 7, lines 6-9 and 50-54), the flow passage forming substrate (Fig. 2, element 4) includes a common flow channel (Fig. 2, element 6) which communicates with a flow passage (Fig. 1, element 46) formed in the support substrate and an individual flow channel (Fig. 2, element 7) which communicates with the common flow channel (Column 6, lines 57-65), and among a corner portion (Fig. 8, elements 6b, 6c) of an end portion (Fig. 8, element 6a) of the common flow channel (Fig. 8, element 6), an angle (Fig. 8, i.e. supplementary angle of θ 1 or θ 2 ) of the corner portion which is closest to the individual flow channel (Fig. 8, element 7) is larger than 90° (Column 7, lines 43-49), wherein the liquid ejection apparatus prints by ejecting an ink from the liquid ejection head onto a printing medium (Column 1, lines 15-27, i.e. ink jet printer). The examiner notes to applicant that the limitations concerning the corner portion of the end portion of the common flow channel are broad in scope and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Momose as applied above. Conclusion In view of the foregoing, the above claims have failed to patentably distinguish over the applied art. The remaining references listed on forms 892 and 1449 have been reviewed by the examiner and are considered to be cumulative to or less material than the prior art references relied upon in the rejection above. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Geoffrey Mruk whose telephone number is (571)272-2810. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30 PM. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ricardo Magallanes can be reached at (571) 272-5960. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /GEOFFREY S MRUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853 06/02/2026 Application/Control Number: 18/819,688 Page 2 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/819,688 Page 3 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/819,688 Page 4 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/819,688 Page 5 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/819,688 Page 6 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/819,688 Page 7 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/819,688 Page 8 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/819,688 Page 9 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/819,688 Page 10 Art Unit: 2853 Application/Control Number: 18/819,688 Page 11 Art Unit: 2853
Prosecution Insights